摘要
      研究了废水中抗生素抗性细菌（ARB）的存在，并评估了废水处理厂（WWTPs）在促进或限制抗生素抗性方面的作用。在位于米兰市区（意大利）的三个污水处理厂监测大肠杆菌（大肠杆菌）和总异养细菌（THB）对氨苄西林，氯霉素和四环素的耐药性，其中生物过程的操作参数，消毒过程（以次氯酸钠，紫外线辐射，过乙酸为基准），并符合排放限值。从处理顺序的三个采样点（污水处理厂进水，砂滤的出水，污水处理厂出水）收集废水。

对于大肠杆菌和泰铢都观察到对氨苄青霉素的抗生素抗性。污水处理厂污水中氨苄青霉素抗性细菌占大肠杆菌的20-47％，THB计数为16-25％。仅对大肠杆菌观察到对氯霉素的有限抗性，而对大肠杆菌和THB四环素抗性均未观察到。生物处理和沙过滤导致氨苄青霉素抗性细菌的最大百分比降低（大肠杆菌为20-29％，THB为11-21％）。但是，传统上采用的参数似乎不足以支持WWTP在ARB扩散中的作用的解释。与UV辐射和次氯酸钠不同，过乙酸有效选择性地作用于耐抗生素的THB。在农业再利用的情况下，污水处理厂最终流出物中的大肠杆菌数量不足以比较不同消毒过程对抗生素耐药性的影响。

The presence of antibiotic resistant bacteria (ARB) in wastewater was investigated and the role of wastewater treatment plants (WWTPs) in promoting or limiting antibiotic resistance was assessed. Escherichia coli (E. coli) and total heterotrophic bacteria (THB) resistance to ampicillin, chloramphenicol and tetracycline was monitored in three WWTPs located in Milan urban area (Italy), differing among them for the operating parameters of biological process, for the disinfection processes (based on sodium hypochlorite, UV radiation, peracetic acid) and for the discharge limits to be met. Wastewater was collected from three sampling points along the treatment sequence (WWTP influent,effluent from sand filtration, WWTP effluent).

      Antibiotic resistance to ampicillin was observed both for E. coli and for THB. Ampicillin resistant bacteria in the WWTP influents were 20–47% of E. coli and 16–25% of THB counts. A limited resistance to chloramphenicol was observed only for E. coli, while neither for E. coli nor for THB tetracycline resistance was observed. The biological treatment and sand filtration led to a decrease in the maximum percentage of ampicillin-resistant bacteria (20–29% for E. coli, 11–21% for THB). However, the conventionally adopted parameters did not seem adequate to support an interpretation of WWTP role in ARB spread. Peracetic acid was effective in selectively acting on antibiotic resistant THB, unlike UV radiation and sodium hypochlorite. The low counts of E. coli in WWTP final effluents in case of agricultural reuse did not allow to compare the effect of the different disinfection processes on antibiotic resistance.

https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0045653517316843